01234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789
>> I suppose that many users returned back to 2.6 for this reason.
>> There should be a clear warning that saving is still possible, only it was renamed to "overwrite". >> IMO, the intention of the authors was to educate the users and remind them that at the opening of a file, the data are internally converted to the working format, and at the saving they are converted back to original format. But this intention missed its goal, because the user is not informed what and why was changed, and when he sees that the application behaves in a weird and user-unfriendly way, then the simplest solution is to downgrade back to the last sane version.
>
> I think the real intention was to prevent the user from accidentally writing to a file format that throws away any layers which have been created and other useful image information.


Which is in other words the same what I wrote, or at least what I wanted to express.

> It's a shame to revert to 2.6 just for this reason. You miss out on a LOT of new functionality

For an average user, GIMP already has everything what we need. But it does be a shame that many of us were forced by this unfortunate change to revert to 2.6.

> and all you've really done is save yourself the minor trouble of learning a different save hotkey combo.

Of course, once I know that saving is still possible, it is only a minor nuisance to use it under another name. (This could be repaired without changing the code, only by a different localization.) But the serious harm is that when we upgrade to 2.8 and see that "save" does not behave in the expected, logical and traditional way (as it ever behaved in previous versions and as still behaves in other applications (for example Inkscape)), that is to save to the file which was opened, then we consider this version broken and cannot guess that this function was only hidden on another place and under a different name. My first reaction was exactly the same as of the user who started this thread: to downgrade to 2.6, and so I suppose that we two are not the only ones who did so. The only reason why I did not give up and continued to search for further information about this change (and why I joined this mail-list) is that for me, the GIMP was always a flag-ship of open-source applications and one of proofs that they are better that the commercial ones, because they are written by the users who know what they need. So I was very disappointed when I found this change of functionality and was wondering what happened and why. IMO, the usual approach of open-source programmers is "I need a feature, so I am adding it"; whereas the intention for this change was "I want to prevent other users to do something; I know better than they what is good for them." When I "save as" (now "export as") into a format other than xcf, or "save" (now "overwrite") after opening a file of a format other than xcf, and then "close view", the warning dialog appears which informs me that some editions can be lost; so I see no reason why to have separate menu items for "save" versus "overwrite" and "save as" versus "export as". But as I already said, this would be not much important if the users were properly informed about this contra-intuitive change.
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:    gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list

Reply via email to